Craugastor augusti (Dugès, 1879)

Common Names

Barking Frog (Stebbins, 1951, Amph. W. North Am.: 219; Stebbins, 1966, Field Guide W. North Am. Rept. Amph.: 55; Collins, Huheey, Knight, and Smith, 1978, Herpetol. Circ., 7: 11; Liner, 1994, Herpetol. Circ., 23: 18; Collins, 1997, Herpetol. Circ., 25: 12; Stebbins, 2003, Field Guide W. Rept. Amph., Ed. 3: 201; Frost, McDiarmid, and Mendelson, 2008, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 37: 5; Liner and Casas-Andreu, 2008, Herpetol. Circ., 38: 9; Collins and Taggart, 2009, Standard Common Curr. Sci. Names N. Am. Amph. Turtles Rept. Crocodil., ed. 6: 6; Frost, McDiarmid, Mendelson, and Green, 2012, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 39: 14; Frost, Lemmon, McDiarmid, and Mendelson, 2017, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 43: 10).

Mexican Cliff Frog (Wright and Wright, 1933, Handb. Frogs Toads U.S. Canada: x).

Texas Cliff Frog (Eleutherodactylus latrans: Wright and Wright, 1933, Handb. Frogs Toads U.S. Canada: x).

Common Robber Frog (Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 72).

Common Barking Frog (Craugastor augusti augusti: Liner, 1994, Herpetol. Circ., 23: 18; Liner and Casas-Andreu, 2008, Herpetol. Circ., 38: 9).

Western Barking Frog (Craugastor augusti cactorum: Schmidt, 1953, Check List N. Am. Amph. Rept., Ed. 6: 60; Conant, Cagle, Goin, Lowe, Neill, Netting, Schmidt, Shaw, Stebbins, and Bogert, 1956, Copeia, 1956: 176; Stebbins, 1966, Field Guide W. North Am. Rept. Amph.: 55; Collins, Huheey, Knight, and Smith, 1978, Herpetol. Circ., 7: 11; Liner, 1994, Herpetol. Circ., 23: 18; Crother, Boundy, Campbell, de Queiroz, Frost, Highton, Iverson, Meylan, Reeder, Seidel, Sites, Taggart, Tilley, and Wake, 2001 "2000", Herpetol. Circ., 29: 9; Frost, McDiarmid, and Mendelson, 2008, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 37: 5 Liner and Casas-Andreu, 2008, Herpetol. Circ., 38: 9; Collins and Taggart, 2009, Standard Common Curr. Sci. Names N. Am. Amph. Turtles Rept. Crocodil., ed. 6: 6; Frost, McDiarmid, Mendelson, and Green, 2012, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 39: 14; Frost, Lemmon, McDiarmid, and Mendelson, 2017, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 43: 10),

Western Robber Frog (Eleutherodactylus augusti cactorum: Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 72).

Zweifel's Barking Frog (Eleutherodactylus augusti fuscofemora: Liner, 1994, Herpetol. Circ., 23: 18 Liner and Casas-Andreu, 2008, Herpetol. Circ., 38: 9).

Robber Frog (Eleutherodactylus augusti latrans: Yarrow, 1882, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 24: 24; Strecker, 1915, Baylor Univ. Bull., 18: 47; Strecker, 1928, Contr. Baylor Univ. Mus., 16: 10; Schmidt, 1953, Check List N. Am. Amph. Rept., Ed. 6: 60).

Barking Frog (Eleutherodactylus augusti latrans: Schmidt, 1953, Check List N. Am. Amph. Rept., Ed. 6: 60; Conant, Cagle, Goin, Lowe, Neill, Netting, Schmidt, Shaw, Stebbins, and Bogert, 1956, Copeia, 1956: 176; Conant, 1975, Field Guide Rept. Amph. E. Cent. N. Am., Ed. 2: 303).

Eastern Barking Frog (Craugastor augusti latrans: Stebbins, 1966, Field Guide W. North Am. Rept. Amph.: 55; Collins, Huheey, Knight, and Smith, 1978, Herpetol. Circ., 7: 11; Liner, 1994, Herpetol. Circ., 23: 18; Collins, 1997, Herpetol. Circ., 25: 12; Frost, McDiarmid, and Mendelson, 2008, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 37: 5; Collins and Taggart, 2009, Standard Common Curr. Sci. Names N. Am. Amph. Turtles Rept. Crocodil., ed. 6: 6; Frost, McDiarmid, Mendelson, and Green, 2012, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 39: 14; Frost, Lemmon, McDiarmid, and Mendelson, 2017, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 43: 10).

Eastern Robber Frog (Eleutherodactylus augusti latrans: Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 72).

Balcones Barking Frog (Eleutherodactylus augusti latrans: Crother, Boundy, Campbell, de Queiroz, Frost, Highton, Iverson, Meylan, Reeder, Seidel, Sites, Taggart, Tilley, and Wake, 2001 "2000", Herpetol. Circ., 29: 9; Frost, McDiarmid, and Mendelson, 2008, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 37: 5 Liner and Casas-Andreu, 2008, Herpetol. Circ., 38: 9).

Distribution

Southern Arizona (Quinlan, Santa Rita, Patagonia, Huachuca, and Pajarito Mts.) and northeastern Sonora (Sierra El Tigre) south along the Pacific Coast foothills and mountains of western Mexico; southeastern and south-central New Mexico (Chaves, Doña Ana, Eddy, and Otero counties) south through West Texas to central Texas (USA) south through central (as far east as Hidalgo) and southern Mexico to the Isthmus of Tehuantepec (Oaxaca, Mexico).

Geographic Occurrence

Natural Resident: Mexico, United States of America, United States of America - Arizona, United States of America - New Mexico, United States of America - Texas

Comment

Reviewed by Zweifel, 1967, Cat. Am. Amph. Rept., 41: 1–4. In the Eleutherodactylus (Craugastor) augusti group according to Lynch and Duellman, 1997, Univ. Kansas Mus. Nat. Hist. Spec. Publ., 23: 220. Considered to not be part of a monophyletic Craugastor by Lynch, 2000, Rev. Acad. Colomb. Cienc. Exact. Fis. Nat., 24: 130. Record for central Arizona is doubtful (DRF). Enderson, 2002, Herpetol. Rev., 33: 316, provided a record for the Quinlan Mountains of Pima County, Arizona. Enderson, Bezy, and Bezy, 2004, Herpetol. Rev., 35: 184, provided the record for the Patagonia Mountains, Arizona. Stebbins, 2003, Field Guide W. Rept. Amph., Ed. 3: 201, provided a brief account, figure, and map. Goldberg, Sullivan, Malone, and Schwalbe, 2004, Herpetologica, 60: 312–320, on the basis of mtDNA, morphology, and vocalization found significant differences between Arizona-Sonora populations on one hand and Texas-New Mexico populations on the other, suggesting species distinctiveness. Similarly, Fouquette and Dubois, 2014, Checklist N.A. Amph. Rept.: 276, suggested that published advertisement call descriptions suggested that more than one species could be involved under this name. They discussed the alternative but witheld a formal taxonomic change pending evaluation of population through central Mexico. In the Craugastor (Hylactophryne) augusti species series of Hedges, Duellman, and Heinicke, 2008, Zootaxa, 1737: 44. Padial, Grant, and Frost, 2014, Zootaxa, 3825: 123, rejected the recognition of species groups within Hylactophryne. Seifert, 1978, Herpetol. Rev., 9: 61, provided a record from Pyote, Texas, USA. Lemos-Espinal, 2007, Anf. Rept. Chihuahua Mexico: 49–50, provided an account (as Eleutherodactylus augusti) for Chihuahua, Mexico. Lemos-Espinal and Smith, 2007, Anf. Rept. Coahuila México: 48–49, provided an account (as Eleutherodactylus augusti) for Coahuila, Mexico. Lemos-Espinal and Dixon, 2013, Amphibians and Reptiles of San Luis Potosí: 41–42, provided an account for San Luis Potosí, Mexico. Schwalbe and Goldberg, 2005, in Lannoo (ed.), Amph. Declines: 491–492, provided a detailed account of relevant literature and range; Dodd, 2013, Frogs U.S. and Canada, 1: 192–196, provided an account that summarized relevant literature for the USA populations, although his range map only reflects the range of Craugastor augusti latrans and excludes the USA range of Craugastor augusti cactorum. Streicher, Devitt, Goldberg, Malone, Blackmon, and Fujita, 2014, Mol. Ecol., 23: 3273–3291, discussed the historical phylogeography of the nominal species and its constituent lineages, not only showing that the subspecies cactorum is not an historical unit, but showing that the binomial represents several species, even though the authors did not render any taxonomic remedies. Elliot, Gerhardt, and Davidson, 2009, Frogs and Toads of N. Am.: 296–297, provided an account, photos, and advertisement call. Lemos-Espinal and Smith, 2015, Check List, 11(1642): 1–11, noted the occurrence of the species in Hidalgo, Mexico. Graham, Stevens, and Kelehear, 2015, Herpetol. Rev., 46: 558, provided a record for Brewster County, Texas, USA. Rorabaugh and Lemos-Espinal, 2016, Field Guide Amph. Rept. Sonora: 146–149, provided a detailed account of natural history, morphology, distribution, and conservation status in Sonora, Mexico. García-Vázquez and Kelly-Hernandez, 2016, Herpetol. Rev., 47: 247, provided a record for the Parque Nacional Cerro de la Estrella, Distrito Federal, Mexico. Lemos-Espinal, Smith, and Valdes-Lares, 2019, Amph. Rept. Durango: 57–58, provided a brief account for Durango, Mexico. Lemos-Espinal and Dixon, 2016, Amph. Rept. Hidalgo: 359–360, provided a brief account and map for Hidalgo, Mexico. Quezada-Hipólito, Smith, Suazo-Ortuño, Alvarado-Díaz, González, Thammachoti, and Smart, 2019, Rev. Mexicana Biodiversidad, 90(e902448): 1–15, reported the species in the Rio Grande de Santiago basin in Nayarit and Jalisco, Mexico. Goyenechea and Falcón-Ordaz, 2019, Herpetol. Rev., 50: 521,  reported a locality in northeastern Guanajuato, Mexico. Painter, Stuart, Giermakowski, and Pierce, 2017, Western Wildlife, 4: 34, commented on the range in New Mexico, USA. Tepos-Ramírez, Garduño-Fonseca, Peralta-Robles, García-Rubio, and Cervantes Jiménez, 2023, Check List, 19: 269–292, discussed the distribution and conservation status of the species in Queretaro, Mexico. Bassett, 2023, Reptiles & Amphibians, 30(e18486): 1–18, provided an updated county distribution map for Texas, USA. Castro-Bastidas, Velarde-Garcéz, Jacobo-González, and Serrano-Serrano, 2024, Sonoran Herpetol., 37: 40–48, reported on a collection from the Sierra Surutato, Sinaloa, Mexico. Loc-Barragán, Smith, Woolrich-Piña, and Lemos-Espinal, 2024, Herpetozoa, Wien, 37: 30, reported on the distributional and conservation status in the state of Nayarit, Mexico.  

External links:

Please note: these links will take you to external websites not affiliated with the American Museum of Natural History. We are not responsible for their content.

• For access to general information see Wikipedia
• For additional sources of general information from other websites search Google
• For access to relevant technical literature search Google Scholar
• For images search CalPhoto Images and Google Images
• To search the NIH genetic sequence database, see GenBank
• For additional information see AmphibiaWeb report
• For information on conservation status and distribution see the IUCN Redlist
• For information on distribution, habitat, and conservation see the Map of Life
• For related information on conservation and images as well as observations see iNaturalist
• For access to available specimen data for this species, from over 350 scientific collections, go to Vertnet.